Form 718 Dept of ED CFO Grantee Questionnaire

U.S. Department of Education

2014 Grantee Satisfaction Survey

Introduction

The Department of Education (ED) is committed to serving and satisfying its customers. To this end, we have commissioned the CFI Group, an independent third-party research group, to conduct a survey that asks about your experience as a grant recipient of the [Program Name from Q1] and the ways we can improve our service to you.   

CFI Group and the Department of Education will treat all information in a secure fashion. Your answers are voluntary, but your opinions are very important. Your responses will remain anonymous and will only be reported in aggregate to Department personnel. This brief survey will take about 15 minutes of your time. This survey is authorized by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Control No. 1090-0007 which expires on March 31, 2015.

If you have any questions about this survey, please contact Jeanne Nathanson at [email protected]. 

Please note that ALL questions on this survey (unless noted otherwise) refer to your experiences over the PAST 12 MONTHS.

Program

NOTE: THE FOLLOWING QUESTION WILL HAVE THE RESPONSE AUTOMATICALLY “PIPED IN” FROM THE RESPONDENT LIST. THE RESPONDENT WILL NOT SEE THE QUESTION Q1. THIS INFORMATION WILL DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE CORE AND CUSTOM QUESTIONS THE RESPONDENT WILL RECEIVE.

Note that individuals will be asked to respond based on their experiences with the program (e.g., OELA) vs. the individual research centers.

Q1. PROGRAM RESPONDENTS WILL BE ANSWERING QUESTIONS FOR:

Office of English Language Acquisition (OELA)

1. Native American and Alaska Native Children in School Program

2. National Professional Development Program

Office of Career, Technical and Adult Education (OCTAE)

3. Adult Education and Family Literacy to State Directors of Adult Education

4. Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education State Directors

Institute of Education Science (IES)

5. National Center for Education Research (NCER)

6. National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER)

Office of Chief Financial Officer (OCFO)

7. Financial Improvement and Post Audit Operations / Indirect Cost Group (FIPAO/ICG)

Office of Postsecondary Education (OPE)

8. American Overseas Research Centers Program (AORC)

9. Talent Search (TS)

10. Student Support Services (SSS)

11. Upwards Bound (UB)

12. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU)

Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP)

13. State Directors of Special Education (Part B)

14. Lead Agency Early Intervention Coordinators (Part C)

Office of Elementary and Secondary Education (OESE)

15. Improving Teacher Quality State Grants

16. 21^st Century Community Learning Centers

17. Alaska Native Education (ANE) Program

18. Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program

19. Mathematics and Science Partnerships

20. Payments for Federally Connected Children (Section 8003)

21. Payments for Federal Property (Section 8002)

22. Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge Fund

23. Indian Education Formula Grants to Local Educational Agencies & National Activities

24. Migrant Education Programs (Title I, Part C)

25. High School Equivalency Program – Migrant Education

26. Safe and Supportive Schools Program

27. Carol White Physical Education Program

28. Elementary and Secondary School Counseling Program

29. School Improvement Fund

30. Improving Basic Programs Operated by Local Educational Agencies – Title I

31. English Language Acquisition State Grants (Title III State Formula Grants)

32. Education for Homeless Children and Youth – McKinney-Vento

33. Neglected and Delinquent State and Local Agency Programs

34. Rural Education Achievement Program/Rural and Low Income School Program

35. Rural Education Achievement Program/Small, Rural School Achievement Program

When answering the survey, please only think about your interactions with [ANSWER FROM Q1]. (Note: Individuals will be asked to respond based on their experiences with the program (e.g., OELA) vs. the individual research centers).

ED Staff

[INTRO IF Q1=1-7, 13-35]

Please think about the interactions you have had with senior [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] officers (e.g. the Director of the Office that administers this grant program) and/or other [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff.

PLEASE NOTE: This does not include technical assistance to states to build state capacity to implement education reforms, such as regional labs, national associations, contractors, etc.  (Note: Do not include statement for IES)

[INTRO IF Q1=8-12]

Please think about the interactions you have had with senior [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] officers (e.g. the Director of the Office that administers this grant program) and/or other [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff.

PLEASE NOTE: This does not include technical assistance to states to build state capacity to implement education reforms, such as regional labs, national associations, contractors – including those that service G5, grants.gov, etc.

[Q2-8 ALL PROGRAMS]

On a scale from 1 to 10, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the senior [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] officers’ and/or other [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff’s:

If a question does not apply, please select “N/A”.

Q2. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies, and procedures

Q3. Responsiveness to your questions 

Q4. Accuracy of responses

Q5. Sufficiency of legal guidance in responses

Q6. Consistency of responses with [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff from different program offices

Q7. Collaboration with other [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] programs or offices in providing relevant services

(Ask Q8 only if Q7 is rated<6)

Q8. Please identify a good example of collaboration across programs and/or offices that you would offer as a model for [PROGRAM NAME from Q1].

 

Technical Assistance to States to Build State Capacity to Implement Education Reforms

[ASK Q9a IF Q1=1-7, 13-35]

Q9a. Does this grant program have an education reform focus (e.g., college and career-ready standards and assessments; differentiated recognition, accountability, and support systems; effective teachers and leaders; turning around the lowest-performing schools; data systems to support instruction)?

1. Yes

2. No (SKIP TO Q15)

3. Don’t know (SKIP TO Q15)

[ASK Q9b IF Q1=8-12]

Q9b. Do you have interaction regarding technical assistance to states building state capacity to implement education reforms (e.g., regional labs, comprehensive centers, equity assistance centers, national associations, U.S. Department of Education-funded contractors such as those that service G5, grants.gov, etc.) separate from [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff?

1. Yes

2. No (SKIP TO Q15)

3. Don’t know (SKIP TO Q15)

[Q10-14 ALL PROGRAMS]

Q10.  Please rate the extent to which the technical assistance services provided by DEPARTMENT STAFF have helped build your state capacity to implement education reforms (e.g., college and career-ready standards and assessments; differentiated recognition, accountability, and support systems; effective teachers and leaders; turning around the lowest-performing schools; data systems to support instruction). Use a 10-point scale where “1” is “no impact” and “10” is “very high impact”.

Here are examples of technical assistance that DEPARTMENT STAFF might provide: Non-regulatory guidance; Frequently asked questions (FAQs); Non-regulatory guidance/FAQ addenda; Help desk; Listserv; Outreach; Training (webinars, Director meetings, conference workshops); Consultative services (teleconferences, on-site meeting, video conferences); Peer-to-Peer information sharing among grantees.

Q11.  Please rate the extent to which the technical assistance services provided by DEPARTMENT-FUNDED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDERS have helped build your state capacity to implement education reforms. Department-funded technical assistance providers include regional labs, comprehensive centers, equity assistance centers, national associations, U.S. Department of Education-funded contractors, etc. Use a 10-point scale where “1” is “no impact” and “10” is “very high impact”.

Here are examples of technical assistance that DEPARTMENT-FUNDED TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE PROVIDERS might offer: Training (webinars, workshops, and conferences); Consultative services (teleconferences, on-site meetings, video conferences); Facilitation services; Providing experts to teach skills and advise in their areas of specialization.

Given the technical assistance provided by both Department staff and Department-funded technical assistance providers, to what extent have you been able to accomplish the following RESULTS? Use a 10-point scale, where “1” is “no results” and “10” is “very high results”.

Q12.  Increased knowledge/awareness regarding key issues in education reform.

Q13.  Higher quality implementation of this program.

Q14.  Our state was able to develop, improve or support promising practices.

[Q15-20 ALL PROGRAMS]

Online Resources

Please think about your experience using [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s online resources. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the:

Q15.  Ease of finding materials online  

Q16.  Ease of submitting information to [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] via the web (e.g., grant applications, annual reports, and accountability data)

Q17. Freshness of content

Q18. Ability to accomplish what you want on the site

Q19. Ease of reading the site

Q20. Ease of navigation

[Q21-22 ALL PROGRAMS]

Technology

Q21.  Now think about how [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] uses technology (e.g., conference calls, video-conferencing, Web conferencing, listservs) to deliver its services to you. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s effectiveness in using technology to deliver its services.

(Ask Q22 only if Q21 is rated<6)

Q22.  Please describe how [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] could better use technology to deliver its services.

 

[ASK Q23-26 ONLY IF Q1=1-4, 7, 13-35]

Q23.  Think about how [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] is working with the states and LEAs to develop an automated process to share accountability information. Please rate the quality of this assistance from [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]. Use a 10-point scale where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent.”

Q24.  How effective has this automated process been in improving your state/LEA reporting? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective.”

Q25. What reporting system do you use for reporting accountability data?

1. EDEN/EDFacts

2. Other electronic system (Specify)

3. Do not use electronic system, submit hard copy

Q26.  How much of a reduction in federal paperwork do you expect over the next few years because of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s initiative to promote the use of technology in reporting accountability data (e.g. EDEN/EDFacts)? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “Not very significant” and “10” is “Very significant.” 

[ASK intro text ONLY IF Q1=1-4, 7, 13-35]

Documents

Think about the documents (e.g., publications, guidance, memoranda, and frequently asked questions) you receive from [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]. 

[ASK intro text ONLY IF Q1=5 or 6]

Documents

Think about the documents (e.g., publications, guidance, memoranda, and frequently asked questions) you receive or download from IES. 

[ASK Q27-Q31 IF Q1=1-7, 13-35]

On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent, please rate the documents’:

Q27.  Clarity

Q28.  Organization of information

Q29.  Sufficiency of detail to meet your program needs

Q30.  Relevance to your areas of need

Q31.  Comprehensiveness in addressing the scope of issues that you face 

[ASK Q32-Q41 IF Q1=8-12]

When you were preparing your application, how easy was it for you to locate and understand the information in the application package? Please rate the following on a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “very difficult” and “10” is “very easy”.

Q32. Program Purpose

Q33. Program Priorities

Q34. Selection Criteria

Q35. Review Process

Q36. Budget Information and Forms

Q37. Deadline for Submission

Q38. Dollar Limit on Awards

Q39. Page Limitation Instructions

Q40. Formatting Instructions

Q41. Program Contact

[ASK Q42-45 ONLY TO ALL TO ALL OESE PROGRAMS Q1 = 15-35]

Q42. How effective have the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education’s (OESE’s) technical assistance services been in helping you learn to implement your OESE-funded grant programs? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective.”

Q43. How useful have OESE’s technical assistance services been in serving as a model that you can replicate with your subgrantees?  Please use a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” is “very useful.” If you do not have subgrantees or this does not apply, please select “not applicable.”

Q44. Describe your best customer service experience during the past 12 months with the U.S. Department of Education staff who work on this program. (Open end)

Q45. Describe your worst customer service experience during the past 12 months with the U.S. Department of Education staff who work on this program. (Open end)

[Q46-Q48 ALL PROGRAMS]

ACSI Benchmark Questions

Now we are going to ask you to please consider ALL of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s products and services and not only those we just asked about.

Q46. Using a 10-point scale on which “1” means “Very Dissatisfied” and “10” means “Very Satisfied,” how satisfied are you with [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s products and services?

Q47. Now please rate the extent to which the products and services offered by [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] have fallen short of or exceeded your expectations. Please use a 10-point scale on which "1" now means "Falls Short of Your Expectations" and "10" means "Exceeds Your Expectations."

Q48. Now forget for a moment about the products and services offered by [PROGRAM NAME from Q1], and imagine the ideal products and services. How well do you think [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] compares with that ideal? Please use a 10-point scale on which "1" means "Not Very Close to the Ideal" and "10" means "Very Close to the Ideal."

Now please indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with the following statement.

Q49. Overall, when I think of all of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1]’s products and services, I am satisfied with their quality.

1. Strongly Agree

2. Agree

3. Disagree

4. Strongly Disagree

5. Does Not Apply

Closing

Q50. In the past 6 months, have you issued a formal complaint to [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] to express your dissatisfaction with the assistance you’ve received from an [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] staff member?

1. Yes

2. No
   

Q51. Finally, please describe how [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] can improve its service to you.

Thank you again for your time. To complete the survey and submit the results, please hit the “Finish” button below. Have a good day!

NOTE: EACH RESPONDENT WILL ONLY RECEIVE 1 SET OF APPROXIMATELY 1-12 CUSTOM QUESTIONS CONCERNING THEIR PROGRAM

Again, only think about your interactions with of [PROGRAM NAME from Q1] when answering the following questions.

ONLY IF Q1=1 NATIVE AMERICAN AND ALASKA NATIVE CHILDREN IN SCHOOL PROGRAM ASK BELOW

Title III, Native American and Alaska Native Children in School, Customer Survey Questions

1. What recommendations would you like to make to the program staff of Title III Native American and Alaska Native Children in School to assist you in administering your grant effectively? (Open ended)

ONLY IF Q1=2 National Professional Development Program ASK BELOW

1. What recommendations would you like to make to the program staff of Title III NPD program to assist you in administering your grant effectively? (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=3 Adult Education and Family Literacy to the State Directors of Adult Ed (AEFLA) ASK 1-12 BELOW

1. Think about the National Reporting System as a way to report your state’s performance data to OCTAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the NRS’s ease of reporting using the NRS Web-based system.

2. Think about the training offered by OCTAE through its contract to support the National Reporting System (NRS). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the usefulness of the training.

If you have been monitored, think about the federal monitoring process as it relates to your AEFLA grant. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is,” Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the federal monitoring process on the following:

3. Being well-organized

4. Providing pre-planning adequate guidance

5. Setting expectations for the visit

6. Using state peer reviewers in the federal monitoring process

Think about the national meetings and conference offered by OCTAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent”, please rate the information provided at these conferences and institutes on the following:

7. Being up-to-date

8. Relevance of information

9. Usefulness to your program

Think about the national activities offered by DAEL. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is,” Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the activities on the following:

10. Usefulness of the products in helping your state meet AEFLA program priorities.

11. How well does the technical assistance provided through the national activities address your program priorities and needs? Please use a 10-point scale where “1” means “does not address needs very well” and “10” means “addresses needs very well.”

12. What can DAEL do over the next year to meet your state’s technical assistance/program improvement needs? (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1= 4 Carl D. Perkins Career & Technical Education Program to the State Directors of Career & Technical Ed ASK 1-9 BELOW

Think about the Consolidated Annual Report (CAR) as a way to report your state’s performance data to OCTAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the CAR’s:

1. User-friendliness

2. Compatibility with state reporting systems

If you were monitored by OCTAE within the last year, think about the federal monitoring process as it relates to your Perkins grant. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the federal monitoring process in:

3. Identifying and correcting compliance issues in your state

4. Helping you to improve program quality

5. Think about the national leadership conferences and institutes offered by OCTAE last year (i.e., Virtual Data Quality Institute in Washington, DC; Rigorous Programs of Study Grantee Meeting in Washington, DC; Quarterly State Director’s Webinars). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the effectiveness of these sessions on helping you to improve the quality of your career and technical education programs and accountability systems.

6. Think about the Perkins Collaborative Resource Network (PCRN) administered by OCTAE. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate PCRN’s usefulness to your program.

If you used the state plan submission database last year, think about this process as a way of submitting your five-year state plan revisions to OCTAE. (If you did not use the state plan submission database please select “N/A.”) On a 10 point scale, where “1” is Poor” and “10” is Excellent,” please rate the database on its:

7. User-friendliness

8. Compatibility with state reporting systems

9. What can OCTAE do over the next year to meet your state’s technical assistance and program improvement needs? (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=5 National Center for Education Research (NCER) ASK 1-6 BELOW

1. How many grants have you received from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES)?

a. 1

b. 2 or more

2. Please think about the interactions you have had with IES program officers. On a 10 point scale,

where "1" is "poor" and "10" is "excellent," how would you rate the help you received in each of the following areas? (Note: Be sure to include a "Not Applicable" option)

a. Understanding application requirements

b. Discussing or reviewing your draft proposal

c. Interpreting the comments your application received from peer review

d. Identifying ways to strengthen your research design or methods

e. Solving problems you encounter with your grant project (e.g., trouble recruiting sample, personnel

changes, etc.)

f. Modifying or extending your grant award

g. Discussing options for publication and dissemination

3. Please describe how IES program officers could improve the help they provide. (Open ended)

4. Please think about the accessibility of IES program officers. On a 10 point scale, where "1" is "Not at all accessible" and 10 is "very accessible," how would you rate them?

5. Please think about the recent one-day, Principal Investigator meetings you have attended. On a 10 point scale, where "1" is "poor" and "10" is "excellent," how would you rate each of the following?

a. Presentations by IES and ED leadership

b. Researcher-led presentations on findings, methods or special topics

c. One-on-one or small group meetings with IES program officers

d. Opportunities to interact with other IES grantees

e. Laptop or poster presentations

6. Please describe how the annual Principal Investigator meetings could be improved. (Open ended)

ONLY IF Q1=6 National Center for Special Education Research (NCSER) ASK 1-6 BELOW

1. How many grants have you received from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES)?

a. 1

b. 2 or more

2. Please think about the interactions you have had with IES program officers. On a 10 point scale,

where "1" is "poor" and "10" is "excellent," how would you rate the help you received in each of the following areas? (Note: Be sure to include a "Not Applicable" option)

a. Understanding application requirements

b. Discussing or reviewing your draft proposal

c. Interpreting the comments your application received from peer review

d. Identifying ways to strengthen your research design or methods

e. Solving problems you encounter with your grant project (e.g., trouble recruiting sample, personnel

changes, etc.)

f. Modifying or extending your grant award

g. Discussing options for publication and dissemination

3. Please describe how IES program officers could improve the help they provide. (Open ended)

4. Please think about the accessibility of IES program officers. On a 10 point scale, where "1" is "Not at all accessible" and 10 is "very accessible," how would you rate them?

5. Please think about the recent one-day, Principal Investigator meetings you have attended. On a 10 point scale, where "1" is "poor" and "10" is "excellent," how would you rate each of the following?

a. Presentations by IES and ED leadership

b. Researcher-led presentations on findings, methods or special topics

c. One-on-one or small group meetings with IES program officers

d. Opportunities to interact with other IES grantees

e. Laptop or poster presentations

6. Please describe how the annual Principal Investigator meetings could be improved. (Open ended)

ONLY IF Q1=7 Financial Improvement and Post Audit Operations / Indirect Cost Group (FIPAO/ICG) ASK 1-6 BELOW

1. On a 10-point scale where “1” is poor and “10” is excellent, please rate the Department of Education Indirect Cost Group Staff in the following areas:

1. Knowledge of applicable regulations and guidance regarding indirect cost rates.

2. Timeliness of responses for technical assistance.

3. Timeliness of providing indirect cost rates.

4. Professionalism and Courtesy of the staff.

2. Has the Cost Allocation Guide for State and Local Governments (dated September 2009) been a useful tool to assist with the preparation of your indirect cost rate submission and LEA plans?

   1. Yes

   2. No

3. Are there any recommendations you have for improvement of this guide? (Open End)

4. Would you be agreeable to a standardized computerized indirect rate submission format?

   1. Yes

   2. No

5. (if Q4=b) Please indicate the reason(s) why not.

6. What improvements would you suggest to help provide for a more timely receipt of the indirect cost rate agreements? (Open End)

ONLY IF Q1=8 American Overseas Research Centers Program (AORC) ASK 1-8 BELOW

Using a 10-point scale where 1 means “not competent”, and 10 means “highly competent”, please rate the program officer’s performance on the following items.

The program officer:

1. Provides technical assistance that is clear and thorough, based on program officer’s subject matter expertise.

2. Understands the legislative purpose and role of the overseas research centers.

3. Explains how to submit interim and annual performance reports into the International Resource Information System (IRIS).

4. Understands the contexts in which the overseas research centers operate.

5. Encourages the centers to disseminate best practices and project highlights to U.S. and overseas constituencies.

6. Monitors progress towards project goals.

7. Makes suggestions to improve efficiency and effectiveness.

8. Provides feedback on your specific project that is both reasoned and reasonable.

ONLY IF Q1=9 Talent Search ASK 1-9 BELOW

1. In interacting with the U.S Department of Education (ED) Talent Search (TS) program specialist responsible for overseeing your grant, please rate service/support in the following areas on a 1 to 10 scale where 1 means Poor and 10 means Excellent.

If a service area does not apply, please select “N/A”

1. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulation, policies and procedures, including updated programmatic knowledge as necessitated by HEOA (Higher Education Opportunity Act).

2. Responsiveness to your inquiries (by email, telephone, letter etc.)

3. Ability to assist you in interacting with institutional officials, if necessary in the resolution of critical internal programmatic issues.

4. Knowledge of the annual performance report.

5. Ability to assist with questions about the completion and submission of the report.

6. Processing of administrative action request, including change in key personnel and budget revisions, within 30 days.

2. In interacting with the U.S Department of Education (ED) Talent Search (TS) program specialist responsible for overseeing your grant, please rate the service /support in the following areas on a 1 to 10 scale where 1 means Poor and 10 means Excellent.

If you did not receive information or feedback in an area please select “N/A”

1. Compliance Issues

2. Fiscal Issues

3. Grant Management Issues

4. Evaluation Issues

5. No-Cost Extension Issues

6. Annual Performance Report

7. Project Director’s Meeting at COE

3. In interacting with the U.S Department of Education (ED) Talent Search (TS) program Annual Performance Report (APR) helpdesk responsible for assisting you with technical issue on the website, please rate the service /support in the following areas, again using a 1 to 10 scale.

1. CBMI assistance with technical Issues

2. Assistance with the website

4. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor “ and “10” is “excellent”, please rate the technical assistance provided by the program specialist assigned to your grant on the following:

1. Technical Assistance

2. Timeliness of responses

3. Clarity of information

4. Usefulness to the program

5. Think about your experience seeking information from the Talent Search Program website http://www2.ed.gov/programs/triotalent/index.html . Using a 10 point scale, where “1” is poor and “10” is excellent; please rate the website on the following:

1. Organization of information.

2. User friendliness.

5. Please respond “yes or no” to rate the ED program updates at COE conference?

1. Was the information presented to you effective?

2. Were all your questions and or concerns addressed?

5. Do you have any suggestions for simplifying the Annual Performance Report process? (Open-end)

6. How frequently would you like to have in-person meetings, webinars or other means of technical assistance?

1. Quarterly

2. Annually

3. Bi-annually

5. Please name area(s) in the Talent Search program that the technical assistance or individualized support received helped you improve? (Open-end)

ONLY IF Q1=10 Student Support Service ASK 1-2 BELOW

1. In interacting with the U.S. Department of Education (ED) Student Support Services (SSS) program specialist responsible for overseeing your grant, please rate the service/support in the following areas on a 1 to 10 scale where 1 means Poor and 10 means Excellent.

If a service area does not apply, please select “N/A”.

1. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies and procedures, including updated programmatic knowledge as necessitated by HEOA

2. Responsiveness to your inquiries (by email, telephone, letter, etc.)

3. Ability to assist you in interacting with institutional officials, if necessary, in the resolution of critical internal SSS program issues

4. Ability to interpret legislation and regulations, specifically, on the administration (including calculation of correct institutional match, if applicable) and assistance with procedures for distribution of grant aid monies

5. Knowledge of the SSS annual performance report.

6. Ability to assist with questions about the completion and submission of the report

7. Processing of administrative action requests, including change in key personnel and budget revisions, within 30 days

8. Ability to respond to all issues raised based solely on interpretation of laws, regulations and Department policies without personal bias or administrative preference

2. Please provide any additional comments on your assigned SSS program specialist. (Open-end)

ONLY IF Q1=11 Upward Bound (UB) ASK 1-2 BELOW

1. In interacting with the U.S. Department of Education (ED) Upward Bound (UB) program specialist responsible for overseeing your grant, please rate the service/support on a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is Poor and 10 is Excellent on the following areas.

If a service area does not apply, please select “N/A”.

a. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulations, policies and procedures, including updated programmatic knowledge as necessitated by HEOA

b. Responsiveness to your inquiries (by email, telephone, letter, etc.)

c. Ability to assist you in interacting with institutional officials, if necessary, in the resolution of critical internal programmatic issues

d. Knowledge of the annual performance report.

e. Ability to assist with questions about the completion and submission of the report

e. Processing of administrative action requests, including change in key personnel and budget revisions, within 30 days.

f. Ability to respond to all issues raised based solely on interpretation of laws, regulations and Department policies without personal bias or administrative preference

2. Please provide any additional comments on the Upward Bound program specialist who worked with you. (Open-end)

ONLY IF Q1=12 Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) ASK 1-7 BELOW

1. Think about your experience seeking information from the HBCU Program website. Using a 10 point scale, where “1” is poor and “10” is excellent; please rate the website on the following:

1. Ability to navigate the information needed.

2. User friendliness.

2. In interacting with the HBCU program officer responsible for overseeing your grant, please rate the service/support in the following areas using a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is Poor and 10 is Excellent:

If a service area does not apply, please select “N/A”

1. Knowledge of relevant legislation, regulation, policies and procedures, including updated programmatic knowledge as necessitated by HEOA (Higher Education Opportunity Act).

2. Responsiveness to your inquiries (by email, telephone, letter etc.)

3. Knowledge of the annual performance report.

4. Ability to assist with questions about the completion and submission of the report.

5. Processing of administrative action request, including change in key personnel and budget revisions, within 30 days.

3. What suggestions do you have for improving the annual performance report? (Open-end)

4. In interacting with the HBCU program officer responsible for overseeing your grant, please rate the service/support in the following areas on a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is Poor and 10 is Excellent:

If you did not receive information or feedback in an area please select “N/A”

1. Compliance Issues

2. Fiscal Issues

3. Grant Management Issues

4. Evaluation Issues

5. No-Cost Extension Issues

6. Annual Performance Report

7. Grant Closeout

5. Does the leadership of your institution provide the support required for the successful implementation of the grant?

   1. Yes

   2. No

6. Please provide at least one major example how this grant is making a positive contribution in achieving the mission of the institution? (Open-end)

7. Provide examples that show the impact the grant is making on increasing student persistence toward degree attainment? (Open-end)

ONLY IF Q1=13 State Directors of Special Education ASK 1-5 BELOW Assistance from OSEP Staff.

Think about the technical assistance and support provided by state Contacts from the Monitoring and State Improvement Planning (MSIP) Division of the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the staff’s:

Q1. Clarity of information received in developing your state’s applications, annual performance reports and other required submissions

Q2. Timeliness of responses (i.e., returning phone calls; responding to emails; forwarding to others when appropriate)

Q3. What improvements can you suggest regarding support from MSIP state contacts?

Think about the types of technical assistance and support provided by OSEP such as Dear Colleague letters, Question and Answer documents, MSIP monthly TA calls, OSEP-Director’s newsletter, topical webinars, etc.

Q4. Which types of assistance were most effective in helping you meet federal requirements and/or improve program quality?

Q5. Which types of assistance were least helpful?

ONLY IF Q1=14 Lead Agency Early Intervention Coordinators ASK 1-5 BELOW

Assistance from OSEP Staff

Think about the technical assistance and support provided by state contacts from the Monitoring and State Improvement Planning (MSIP) Division of the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the staff’s:

Q1. Clarity of information received in developing your state’s applications, annual performance reports and other required submissions.

Q2. Timeliness of responses (i.e., returning phone calls; responding to emails; forwarding to others when appropriate)

Q3. What improvements can you suggest regarding support from MSIP state contacts?

Think about the types of technical assistance and support provided by OSEP such as Dear Colleague letters, Question and Answer documents, MSIP monthly TA calls, OSEP-Director’s newsletter, topical webinars, etc.

Q4. Which types of assistance were most effective in helping you meet federal requirements and/or improve program quality?

Q5. Which types of assistance were least helpful?

ONLY IF Q1=15 Improving Teacher Quality State Grants ASK 1-3 BELOW

Please rate the U.S. Department of Education Title II, Part A Program staff on the following. Use a scale from "1" to "10", where "1" means "poor" and "10" means "excellent."

Q1. Ease of reaching the person who could address your concern

Q2. Ability to resolve your issue

Q3. What additional service could the program provide that would help you? (For example, information posted on-line, webinars, analysis tools, etc.) (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=16 21^st Century Community Learning Centers ASK 1-10 BELOW

1. How long have you served as the 21^st CCLC State Director?

   1. Less than one year

   2. More than one year

   3. I am not the state director but I have served in a leadership (decision-making) capacity for this program for less than one year.

   4. I am not the state director but I have served in a leadership (decision-making) capacity for this program for more than one year.

2. Please rate the knowledge of the U.S. Department of Education staff on 21^st CCLC program grant administration issues and on program administration issues as they assist the states. Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “poor” and “10” being “excellent.”

3. How helpful is the information on the 21^st CCLC program’s You for Youth (Y4Y) website? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very helpful” and “10” being “very helpful.”

4. How easy is it to navigate is the Y4Y website? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very easy” and “10” being “very easy.”

5. How helpful is the information generated from the Program and Profile Information Collection System (PPICS)? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very helpful” and “10” being “very helpful.”

6. What suggestions do you have for improving the PPICS reporting process? (Open-ended)

7. Would you prefer 21^st CCLC program in-person meetings to include SEAs only OR SEAs and Center-level staffs?

   1. SEAs only

   2. Both SEAs and Center-level staffs

8. Based on your selection of [PIPE IN Q7 SELECTION], please rate the extent to which you prefer that the 21^st CCLC program convene regional technical assistance meetings. Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “never” and “10” being “always.”

9. Based on your selection of [PIPE IN Q7 SELECTION], please rate the extent to which you prefer to that the 21^st CCLC program convene national technical assistance meetings. Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “never” and “10” being “always.”

10. What technical assistance topics can the 21^st CCLC program provide at meetings to support the states more effectively? (Open-ended)

ONLY IF Q1=17 Alaska Native Education (ANE) Program ASK 1-9 BELOW

1. How long have you served as the ANE Project Director?

1. Less than one year

2. More than one year

3. I am not the ANE Project Director but I have served in a leadership (decision-making) capacity for this program for less than one year.

4. I am not the ANE Project Director but I have served in a leadership (decision-making) capacity for this program for more than one year.

2. Please rate the knowledge of the U.S. Department of Education staff on ANE program grant administration issues and on program administration issues as they assist your grant project. Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “poor” and “10” being “excellent.”

3. When you were preparing your application, how easy was it for you to locate and understand the information in the application package? Please rate the following on a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “very difficult” and “10” is “very easy.”

1. Program Purpose

2. Program Priorities

3. Selection Criteria

4. Review Process

5. Budget Information and Forms

6. Deadline for Submission

7. Dollar Limit on Awards

8. Page Limitation Instructions

9. Formatting Instructions

10. Program Contact

4. Has your program officer initiated technical assistance or conducted a Quarterly Monitoring Call with you or anyone on the ANE staff during the past 3-6 months?

1. Yes

2. No

5. [IF Q4=a] Where and how did the technical assistance or support take place (Select all that apply)

1. Project Directors’ meeting sponsored by the Department

2. Conference call/email exchange with your Program Officer

3. Program Officer

4. Other Program (or the Department) staff site visit

5. Monitoring contractor (Please specify)

6. National association meeting (Please specify)

7. Other (Please specify)

6. How helpful is the information on the ANE website? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very helpful” and “10” being “very helpful.”

7. What technical assistant topics can the ANE program provide at Project Directors’ meetings to support the implementation of your grant projects more effectively? (Open-ended)

8. How easy is it to navigate the web-based annual performance report process? Please use a 10-point scale with ”1” being “not very easy” and “10” being “very easy.”

9. What suggestions do you have for improving the annual performance report process? (Open-ended)

ONLY IF Q1=18 Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program ASK 1-14 BELOW

1. Please indicate your role.

1. Project Director (ASK Q9-14)

2. Evaluator (ASK Q2-9)

Think about the evaluation technical assistance provided by Abt Associates, the contractor overseen by the Department’s Institute of Education Sciences (IES). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the contractor’s:

2. Technical assistance on the design of your study

3. Technical assistance on your analyses of impact and implementation data

4. Written guidance and input on evaluation report preparation

5. Technical assistance provided through annual Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program meetings

6. Overall helpfulness with solving evaluation challenges and issues

7. Assistance in communicating with ED and grantee staff when appropriate

8. Overall helpfulness in building your organization’s capacity to do high-quality impact and implementation studies

9. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” how would you rate the extent to which Department of Education Program Officers, IES staff, and Abt Associates coordinated their efforts?

On a 10-point scale where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”, please rate the Department of Education Program Staff Skills, Knowledge and Responsiveness in the following areas:

2. Resolution of problems by your current Program Officer

3. Timeliness of response to questions or requests by your current Program Officer

4. Current Program Officer’s knowledge of applicable statutes, regulations, and policies

5. Current Program Officer’s knowledge of relevant program content.

6. Current Program Officer’s knowledge of program evaluation issues

ONLY IF Q1=19 Mathematics and Science Partnerships ASK 1-9 BELOW

1. Please rate the responsiveness of the U.S. Department of Education staff. Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “poor” and “10” being “excellent.”

2. Please rate the knowledge of the U.S. Department of Education staff on math and science issues and on program administration issues as they assist the states. Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “poor” and “10” being “excellent.”

3. How helpful is the information on the MSP website? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very helpful” and “10” being “very helpful.”

4. How easy to navigate is the MSP website? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very easy” and “10” being “very easy.”

5. How helpful is the information on the web-based annual performance report? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very helpful” and “10” being “very helpful.”

6. How easy to navigate is the web-based annual performance report process? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “not very easy” and “10” being “very easy.”

7. Do you have suggestions for improving the annual performance report process? (Open-ended)

8. How helpful and knowledgeable is the contractor support for the program? Please use a 10-point scale with “1” being “poor” and “10” being “excellent.”

9. What can OESE do in the next year to support the states more effectively? (Open-ended)

ONLY IF Q1=20 Payments for Federally Connected Children (Section 8003) ASK 1-13 BELOW

Think about your experience preparing and submitting your most recent Impact Aid application, including gathering and organizing data and preparing the e-application. 

1. Did you use the written instruction and guidance documents provided for the application? 

1. Yes

2. No

2. [IF Q1=a] On a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” rate the effectiveness of the documents in helping you complete the application.

3. Did you contact the Impact Aid Program for technical assistance?

1. Yes

2. No

4. [IF Q3=a] On a scale of “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; rate the Impact Aid Program staff’s performance in answering your questions and helping you to complete your application.

5. Did you contact the G5 Helpdesk for technical assistance?

1. Yes

2. No

6. [IF Q5=a] On a scale of “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; rate the G5 Helpdesk’s performance in resolving your problem.

7. Have you participated in any Webinars or meetings where IAP staff provided you information on the Section 8003 program and the review process?

a. Yes

b. No

8. [IF Q7=a] Did the presentation and/or materials prepared help you to understand your responsibilities in completing the application or submitting data?

   1. Yes 

   2. No 

9. [IF Q8=b] Please explain. (Open end)

10. Has your school district been contacted by the Impact Aid Program in the past year regarding a monitoring or field review of your application?  

    1. Yes

    2. No

11. [IF Q10=a] Did the letter you received provide sufficient explanation of what and how you need to prepare your documents for the review?

1. Yes 

2. No

12. [IF Q11=b] Please explain. (Open end)

13. Did you receive timely communications regarding the outcome of the review?

1. Yes

2. No

14. [IF Q13=b] Please explain. (Open end)

Please use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent” to rate the Impact Aid staff members on the following.

11. Ease of reaching the person who could address your concern

12. Ability to resolve your issue

13. Please provide any additional specific suggestions for how the Impact Aid Program can improve customer service. (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=21 Payments for Federal Property (Section 8002) ASK 1-10 BELOW

Think about your experience preparing and submitting your most recent Impact Aid application, including gathering and organizing data and preparing the e-application. 

1. Did you use the written instruction and guidance documents provided for the application? 

1. Yes

2. No

2. [IF Q1=a] On a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” rate the effectiveness of the documents in helping you complete the application.

3. Did you contact the Impact Aid Program for technical assistance?

1. Yes

2. No
   
   

[IF Q3=a , ASK Q4-Q6] On a scale of “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; rate the Impact Aid Program staff’s:

4. Responsiveness to answering questions

5. Supportiveness in helping you complete your application

6. Knowledge about technical material

7. Have you attended any Webinars or in person meetings where IAP staff provided you information on the Section 8002 program, application submission, or the review process?

   1. Yes

   2. No

8. [IF Q7=a] Did the presentation and/or materials prepared help you understand your responsibilities in submitting data?

   1. Yes

   2. No

8a. [IF Q8=b] Please explain. (Open end)

9. How was the quality of the interaction with Impact Aid program staff members during the review process? Please use a scale from “1” to “10”, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent.”

10. What additional communications would you like to receive regarding the status of your application, prior to receiving a payment? (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=22 Race to the Top (EARLY LEARNING CHALLENGE FUND) ASK 1-8 below

As it relates to the Race to the Top – Early Learning Challenge (RTT-ELC) program, please rate the following using a 10 point scale, where “1” means “Poor” and “10” means “Excellent”

1. Accessibility and responsiveness of program staff

2. Timely resolution of questions by program staff

3. Clarity of information provided by program staff

4. Usefulness and relevance of technical assistance (e.g., webinars, meetings)

5. Usefulness and relevance of monthly conference calls

6. What could the RTT-ELC team do to improve the structure or format of technical assistance? (Open end)

7. How frequently would you like to have in-person meetings, webinars, or other means of technical assistance? (Open end)

8. Please share any comments on how the RTT-ELC team can better support your work. (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=23 Indian Education Formula Grants to Local Education Agencies ASK 1-13 BELOW

Think about the particular ways in which you have received technical support and/or assistance from the Office of Indian Education (OIE). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very Effective”, please rate the effectiveness of technical assistance in:

1. Helping you with your implementation of Title VII Formula grant program in your state/LEA

2. Responsiveness to answering questions and/or information requests

3. Disseminating accurate information

4. Timeliness of providing information to meet your application deadlines

5. Think about the guidance documents (E.g. Getting Started; Frequently Asked Questions; Additional Program Assurances, Web Sites) provided by OIE program office. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very useful” and “10” is “Very useful”; please rate the usefulness of the information in the guidance documents.

6. Think about your working relationship with the Title VII, Office of Indian Education program office. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very Effective”, please rate the effectiveness of this relationship.

Think about the process for applying for a grant through the Electronic Application System for Indian Education (EASIE). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent”, please rate the EASIE System on the following:

7. Ease of using system in applying for a grant

8. Disseminating information in a timely manner

9. Training provided on the EASIE system and grant application process

10. Overall user-friendliness of the EASIE application system

Think about the support and technical assistance provided by OIE during grant application process.

11. Please rate the support and technical assistance on a 10-point scale, where “1” means “poor” and “10” means “excellent”.

12. If you have been monitored, please comment on the effectiveness of the federal monitoring process in such areas as providing guidance and/or improving program quality. (Open end)

13. What can OIE do over the next year to better meet your school district’s technical assistance and program improvement needs? (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=24 Migrant Education Program (MEP) -- Title I, Part C ASK 1-7 BELOW

As it relates to the Migrant Education Program (MEP), please rate the following using a 10 point scale, where “1” means “Poor” and “10” means “Excellent.”

Q1. How have you received technical assistance during the past year? (Check all types that apply – OME-sponsored Directors Meeting, email, listserv, telephone call, webinar, other)

Q2. Usefulness and relevance of semi-annual conference calls

Q3. Usefulness and relevance of Directors Meeting

Q4. Usefulness and relevance of webinars

Q5. Please provide at least one important informational topic that the MEPSTATE Listserv provided to you, and also provide at least one important topic that you would like to see from the MEPSTATE Listserv in the future.

.Q6. Please provide at least one important informational topic that the MIGRANT Listserv provided to you, and also provide at least one important topic that you would like to see from the MIGRANT Listserv in the future.

.Q7. What strategies (e.g. frequent pauses for questions, small group phone calls) could the MEP team use to improve the format (e.g. OME-sponsored Director Meetings, emails, listservs, webinars) of its technical assistance? (Open end)

Q8. Please provide at least one technical assistance topic that has been useful to you, and at least one technical assistance topic that you will need in the future, in order to improve the performance of your MEP. (Open End)

Q9. Please share any comments on how the MEP team can better support your work as a state director. (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=25 High School Equivalency Program (HEP) - Migrant Education ASK 1-11 BELOW

As it relates to the High School Equivalency Program (HEP), please rate the following using a 10 point scale, where “1” means “Poor” and “10” means “Excellent.”

Q1. Accessibility and responsiveness of program staff

Q2. Timely resolution of questions by program staff

Q3. Clarity of information provided by program staff

Q4. Usefulness and relevance of the strategies for technical assistance (e.g., webinars, policy documents, meetings)

Q5. Usefulness and relevance of conference calls

Q6. Usefulness and relevance of courtesy calls.

Q7. What additional topics would you like discussed during HEP meetings, webinars, or phone calls to help you implement a high-quality program? (Open end)

Q8. What could the HEP team do to improve the content of technical assistance? (Open end)

Q9. What could the HEP team do to improve the structure or format of technical assistance? (Open end)

Q10. How frequently would you like to have webinars or other means of technical assistance? (Open end)

Q11. Please share any comments on how the HEP team can better support your work. Please include any ideas that the HEP team may use to better support your work as it relates to your project’s specific needs. (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=26 SAFE AND SUPPORTIVE SCHOOLS ASK 1-10 BELOW

Please see the program-specific questions for the Safe and Supportive Schools (S3) program below. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks.

Think about the one-on-one communication (via phone or email) with your Federal Project Officer. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate your Federal Project Officer on the following:

1. Responsiveness and accuracy in answering questions related to S3 program requirements

2. Responsiveness to answering questions related to Department of Education (EDGAR) and other federal regulations

3. Relevance and usefulness of technical assistance related to grant implementation and administration

4. Timeliness in returning phone calls and responding to emails

5. Effectiveness in providing instructions and guidance related to annual performance reports and GPRA data collection

6. Effectiveness in providing instructions and guidance related to budget development, revisions, and reporting

Think about the technical assistance, including meetings, written guidance, webinars, and presentations that you receive from the S3 technical assistance team. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the following:

7. Relevance and usefulness to your project and program activities

8. Relevance and usefulness to your project’s sustainability

9. Frequency of communication

10. Use of technology to deliver services

ONLY IF Q1=27 Carol White Physical Education Program (PEP) ASK 1-10 BELOW

Think about the one-on-one communications (via phone or email) with your Federal Project Officer. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate your FPO’s:

1. Responsiveness to questions about PEP program requirements

2. Responsiveness to questions about applicable Department of Education (EDGAR) and other federal regulations

3. Timeliness in returning phone calls and responding to emails

4. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or instructions regarding annual performance reports

5. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or guidance regarding budget development, revisions, and reporting

6. Frequency of communication regarding grant information, deadlines, expectations, requirements, or other pertinent information

Think about the written guidance, meetings, webinars, conference calls, and presentations from the PEP Federal Team. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not Very Effective” and “10” is “Very Effective,” please rate the following:

7. Instructions and guidance regarding GPRA data collection and reporting

8. Relevance and usefulness to your program and program activities

9. Relevance and usefulness to your program’s sustainability

10. How important is it that your Federal Project Officer conducts a site visit of your program to observe grant activities and monitor grant compliance and progress. Please base your response on a 10-point scale, where “1” is, “Not Very Important” and “10” is “Very Important.”

ONLY IF Q1=28 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL COUNSELING PROGRAM (ESSC) ASK 1-10 BELOW

Think about the one-on-one communications (via phone or email) with your Federal Project Officer. On a 10-point scale, where "1" is "Not very effective" and "10" is "Very effective," please rate your FPO's:

Q1. Responsiveness to questions about ESSC program requirements

Q2. Responsiveness to questions about applicable Department of Education (EDGAR) and other federal regulations

Q3. Timeliness in returning phone calls and responding to emails

Q4. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or instructions regarding annual performance reports

Q5. Effectiveness in providing technical assistance or guidance regarding budget development, revisions, and reporting

Q6. Frequency of communication regarding grant information, deadlines, expectations, requirements, or other pertinent information

Think about the written guidance, meetings, conference calls, and presentations from the ESSC Federal Team. On a 10-point scale, where "1" is "Not very effective" and "10" is "Very effective," please rate the following:

Q7. Instructions and guidance regarding GPRA data collection and reporting

Q8. Relevance and usefulness to your program and program activities

Q9. Relevance and usefulness to your program's sustainability

Please base your response on a 10-point scale, where "1" is "Not very important" and "10" is "Very important."

Q10. How important is it that your Federal Project Officer conducts a site visit of your program to observe grant activities and monitor grant compliance and progress.

ONLY IF Q1=29 School Improvement Fund ASK 1-12 BELOW

Think about the technical assistance (TA) you have received from the Office of School Turnaround (OST) program staff regarding School Improvement Grants (SIG).

On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent,” please rate the technical assistance provided by program staff on the following...

1. Timeliness of response

2. Clarity of information

3. Usefulness to your program

Think about the one-on-one consultations, (including email, telephone, and other interactions), you have had with OST program staff regarding SIG. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the one-on-one consultations in…

4. Providing you an interpretation of the SIG statute and/or regulations

5. Helping with your implementation of SIG in your state

6. What can the OST program staff do over the next year to meet your state’s technical assistance needs regarding SIG? (Open end)

7. Provide an example of how you have changed practice as a result of any of OST’s technical assistance efforts such as conferences, the online community of practice or peer-to-peer efforts? (open end)

8. Think about the SIG application process. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is not easy to understand and “10” is very easy to understand, please rate the ease of the SIG application process.

9. Have you received a SIG onsite monitoring visit in the past year?

1. Yes (ASK Q10-11)

2. No (SKIP TO Q12)

3. Don’t know (SKIP TO Q12)

Please rate the effectiveness of the SIG monitoring process on a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” with respect to…

10. Helping your state comply with SIG requirements

11. Helping your state improve SIG programs

12. Please share any comments on how to improve the SIG onsite monitoring process. (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=30 TITLE I PART A – IMPROVING BASIC PROGRAMS OPERATED BY LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES (LEAs) ASK 1-5 BELOW

ESEA Flexibility Initiative

1. Think about the technical assistance you have received during the implementation of ESEA flexibility. Please rate the effectiveness of the technical assistance on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 is "not very effective" and 10 is "very effective".

2. Which technical assistance activities provided by ED have been the most effective and why? (open end)

Using a scale from 1 to 10, where “1 means “Poor” and “10” means “Excellent”, please rate the following:

3. The accessibility of the U.S. Department of Education ESEA flexibility program staff

4. The responsiveness of the U.S. Department of Education ESEA flexibility program staff

5. How would you describe your working relationship with ED's ESEA flexibility staff? (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=31 English Language Acquisition State Grants/Title III State Formula Grant Program

ASK 1-15 BELOW

Think about the technical assistance (TA) you have received from the Title III program staff. In particular, think about the individual TA you have received from the Title III program officer assigned to your state.

On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent,” please rate the technical assistance provided by the program officer assigned to your state on the following...

1. Timeliness of response

2. Clarity of information

3. Usefulness to your program

Think about the one-on-one consultations, (including email, telephone, and other interactions), you have had with your Title III program officer over the last year. On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the one-on-one consultations in…

4. Providing you an interpretation of the Title III statute and/or regulations

5. Helping with your implementation of Title III in your state

Now think about all of the technical assistance you have received through Title III webinars, or other TA activities, including use of technology enhanced communications (e.g. listservs).

On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent,” please rate this type of technical assistance on the following...

6. Method of delivery

7. Clarity of information

8. Usefulness to your program

9. What can the Title III program staff do over the next year to meet your state’s technical assistance needs? (Open end)

10. Have you received a Title III onsite monitoring visit in the past 2 years (e.g. 2009-10 or 2010-11)?

1. Yes (ASK Q11-12)

2. No (SKIP TO Q13)

3. Don’t know (SKIP TO Q13)

Please rate the effectiveness of the Title III monitoring process on a 10-point scale where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” with respect to…

11. Helping your state comply with Title III requirements

12. Helping your state improve programs for English learners

13. Please share any comments on how to improve the Title III onsite monitoring process. (Open end)

Think about your experiences seeking information at OELA’s National Clearinghouse for English Language Acquisition’s Web site (www.ncela.gwu.edu). On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the Web site in:

14. Providing you with the information you needed

15. Helping you inform programs serving ELLs in your state

ONLY IF Q1=32 Education for Homeless Children and Youth Program – McKinney-Vento ASK 1-11 BELOW

Think about the technical assistance (TA) you received from individual ED program staff for the Education for Homeless Children and Youth program, including coordination with activities arranged by the technical assistance contractor, National Center for Homeless Education), or independently.

On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent,” please rate the technical assistance provided by the US Department of Education and NCHE staff on the following:

Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.

FORMATTING NOTE – USE 2 COLUMNS FOR EACH QUESTION TO SHOW USDE and NCHE

US Department of Education

1. Responsiveness in answering questions.

2. Knowledge of technical material

Technical Assistance Center (NCHE)

Q1a.Responsiveness in answering questions.

Q2a.Knowledge of technical material

On a scale of 1 to 10, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the technical assistance efforts provided by the US Department of Education and NCHE staff in helping you with the following:

Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.

US Department of Education

3. Meeting program compliance requirements

4. Assisting you (as state coordinators) to impact performance results

5. Developing cross-agency collaborations

Technical Assistance Center (NCHE)

Q3a. Meeting program compliance requirements

Q4a. Assisting you (as state coordinators) to impact performance results

Q5a. Developing cross-agency collaborations

On a scale of 1 to 10, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the quality and usefulness of the TA methods provided by NCHE:

Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.

FORMATTING NOTE – USE 2 COLUMNS FOR EACH QUESTION TO SHOW QUALITY AND USEFULNESS

Quality

6. Direct one-on-one TA calls

7. Webinars

8. State Coordinators meeting

9. Website

10. Products

Usefulness

Q6a.Direct one-on-one TA calls

Q7a.Webinars

Q8a. State Coordinators meeting

Q9a. Website

Q10a.Products

Please respond to the following open-ended question regarding your thoughts on how to improve the assistance and monitoring you receive.

11. What can the Education for Homeless Children and Youth program office do over the next year to meet your state’s technical assistance, program improvement and coordination needs? (Open end)

ONLY IF Q1=33 Neglected and Delinquent State and Local Agency Programs ASK 1-12 BELOW

Think about the technical assistance (TA) you received from individual ED program staff for the Title I, Part D program, including coordination with activities arranged by the technical assistance contractor, Neglected or Delinquent Technical Assistance Center (NDTAC), or independently.

On a 10-point scale, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the technical assistance provided by the US Department of Education and NDTAC staff on the following:

Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.

FORMATTING NOTE – USE 2 COLUMNS FOR EACH QUESTION TO SHOW USDE and NDTAC

US Department of Education

1. Responsiveness in answering questions.

2. Knowledge of technical material

Technical Assistance Center (NDTAC)

Q1a.Responsiveness in answering questions.

Q2a.Knowledge of technical material

On a scale of 1 to 10, where “1” is “Not very effective” and “10” is “Very effective,” please rate the effectiveness of the technical assistance efforts provided by the US Department of Education and NDTAC staff in helping you with the following:

Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.

US Department of Education

3. Meeting program compliance requirements

4. Assisting you (as state coordinators) to impact performance results

5. Developing cross-agency collaborations

Technical Assistance Center (NDTAC)

Q3a.Meeting program compliance requirements

Q4a.Assisting you (as state coordinators) to impact performance results

Q5a.Developing cross-agency collaborations

On a scale of 1 to 10, where “1” is “Poor” and “10” is “Excellent,” please rate the quality and usefulness of the TA methods provided by NDTAC:

Put “NA” if the item is not applicable to you or you don’t know how to respond.

FORMATTING NOTE – USE 2 COLUMNS FOR EACH QUESTION TO SHOW QUALITY AND USEFULNESS

Quality

6. Direct one-on-one TA calls

7. ND Community calls

8. Webinars

9. State Coordinators meeting

10. Website

11. Products

Usefulness

Q6a.Direct one-on-one TA calls

Q7a.ND Community calls

Q8a.Webinars

Q9a.State Coordinators meeting

Q10a.Website

Q11a.Products

12. What can the Title I, Part D program office do over the next year to meet your state’s technical assistance, program improvement and coordination needs?

ONLY IF Q1=34 Rural Education Achievement Program (REAP)/Rural Low-Income School Program ASK 1-15 BELOW

Think about the one-on-one consultations you have had with Rural Low-Income School (RLIS) program officers. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” please rate the effectiveness of the one-on-one consultations in:

1. Providing you with an interpretation of RLIS legislation/regulations

2. Providing guidance on eligibility and/or other reporting requirements

3. Helping you with the implementation of the RLIS Program

Think about the guidance documents provided by the Rural Low-Income Schools program office. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” is “very useful” please rate the guidance documents on:

4. Helping you with compliance efforts

5. Helping you improve performance results

6. Helping you provide guidance and oversight to sub-recipients

7. Helping you provide technical assistance to sub-recipients

Think about your experiences seeking information from the Rural Low- Income Schools Program Web Site http://www2.ed.gov/programs/reaprlisp/index.html. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; please rate the website on the following:

8. Usefulness in providing the information you needed.

9. User friendliness

Think about the monitoring and technical assistance provided by the RLIS program office. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; please rate the monitoring and technical assistance on the following:

10. Responsiveness to information requests

11. Helpfulness in resolving implementation/eligibility issues

12. Supportiveness in helping you complete eligibility spreadsheets

13. Supportiveness in helping you meet annual reporting requirements

Think about the REAP pre-award and post-award teleconferences as a mode of technical assistance. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” please rate the effectiveness of the teleconferences in:

14. Helping you with program implementation for RLIS

15. Helping you complete and submit accurate eligibility spreadsheets for RLIS

ONLY IF Q1=35 Rural Education Achievement Program/Small, Rural School Achievement Program ASK 1-8 BELOW

Think about the one-on-one consultations you have had with Small, Rural School Achievement (SRSA) program officers. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very effective” and “10” is “very effective” -- please rate the effectiveness of the one-on-one consultations in:

1. Providing you with an interpretation of SRSA legislation/regulations

2. Providing guidance on eligibility and/or other reporting requirements

Think about the guidance documents provided by the SRSA program office. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “not very useful” and “10” is “very useful” please rate the guidance documents on:

3. Helping you with compliance efforts

4. Helping you improve performance results

Think about your experiences seeking information from the SRSA Web Site http://www2.ed.gov/programs/reapsrsa/index.html. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; please rate the website on the following:

5. Usefulness in providing the information you needed.

6. User friendliness

Think about the monitoring and technical assistance provided by the SRSA program office. Using a 10-point scale, where “1” is “poor” and “10” is “excellent”; please rate the monitoring and technical assistance on the following:

7. Responsiveness to information requests

8. Helpfulness in resolving your questions and concerns

75